Hire This Temp: Bolton merits permanent job

About the Author

Peter BrookesSenior Fellow, National Security AffairsDouglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign and National Security Policy

You don't often get an opportunity to right a terrible wrong.
But the Senate has a chance to do just that when it gives the
nomination of John Bolton to be U.S. ambassador to the United
Nations a second look starting today.

Last year, after hearings best described as a character smear,
the Senate Foreign Relations Committee refused to give Bolton its
blessing, denying the president's nominee any real chance at a
straight "up or down" vote by the full Senate.

But President Bush still needed an ambassador - and a strong one -
at Turtle Bay. So, after last summer's Senate meltdown, he wisely
gave Bolton a "recess appointment." That temporary posting ends
when the Senate recesses this year - unless the senators vote to
confirm Bolton.

They should. Even as a "temp," Bolton has done a bang-up job at
the United Nations - proving his critics wrong about his
effectiveness.

In fact, so much so that one of his most damning - and surprising
- detractors has changed his tune.

On the Foreign Relations panel, Sen. George Voinovich last year
voiced strong opposition to the White House's nominee - the sole
Republican to align with the committee's Democrats on the
issue.

The Ohio lawmaker claimed he had concerns about Bolton's
management style/interpersonal skills, which made the talented
Bolton (despite his experience at the State and Justice
Departments) the wrong person to represent us at the world
body.

It was hooey then - and it's hooey now.

But Voinovich converted, writing in a Washington Post op-ed that
he's impressed by Bolton's first year at the U.N. - liking his work
on badly-needed reform and rasslin' with the prickly North Koreans
and Iranians.

Voinovich added that if President Bush renominates Bolton (as he's
now done), he'd "vote to confirm him," warning Senate colleagues
that failing to show unity on Bolton will only weaken America's
international position at a critical time.

This time, Voinovich is on the mark. With the Middle East going up
in flames, North Korea brandishing missiles, Iran threatening nukes
and continuing challenges in Iraq and Afghanistan, America needs to
speak with one strong voice at the United Nations.

Bolton has that voice. No shrinking violet, he's just the type of
no-nonsense, "get 'er done" diplomat Washington needs in New York
right now, fighting for American interests in the divided and
increasingly impotent U.N. Security Council.

In recent months, Bolton has gone to the mat with the shameless,
foot-dragging Russians and Chinese to get the United Nations to do
something about the festering Iranian and North Korean nuclear and
missile threats. Thanks to his dogged efforts, the Security Council
has finally made some progress here by issuing a formal statement
calling on Iran to end uranium enrichment (a process vital to
producing nukes).

On North Korea, Bolton got the council to impose targeted
sanctions on Pyongyang, banning the transfer of nuclear/missile
parts or technology, after North Korea launched seven missiles
earlier this month on America's Independence Day.

Bolton birthed the strongest condemnation the Security Council has
issued against North Korea in more than 10 years. It won unanimous
support, even from the slippery Chinese and Russians - no small
feat these days.

Protecting America's $3 billion annual U.N. contribution, Bolton
is making headway in reforming the scandal-ridden world body, too,
including commitments by the General Assembly to improve oversight
and personnel management.

Critics say Bolton isn't popular with his U.N. colleagues. Good!
The likely reason is that Bolton actually expects them to do
something, like solve world problems and clean up the U.N.'s
act.
In less than a year's time, John Bolton has become an
indispensable advocate at the United Nations, advancing and
protecting American interests at a time when we're facing
unparalleled international challenges.

And, with Voinovich's about-face, the fig leaf of bipartisan
opposition to Bolton on the Foreign Relations Committee has gone
poof - leaving Democrats without the cover needed to score more
cheap political points at the expense of our interests and national
security.

With the real progress we've made under Bolton's leadership, it
would be foolish to swap out U.N. ambassadors now. While admitting
mistakes is never easy, the Senate can cover its tracks by
confirming Bolton ASAP.

Peter
Brookes, a senior fellow at The Heritage
Foundation, is the author of "A Devil's Triangle: Terrorism, WMD
and Rogue States."

About the Author

Peter BrookesSenior Fellow, National Security AffairsDouglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign and National Security Policy